[Fluffy]

I had this one today:

pass-1♣
1♠ - 2♣
2♦-pass

2-4 fit, not a success, who is the missbidder?

[gwnn]

depends on agreement but unless 2♦ is specifically agreed as artificial, it must logically be non-forcing. of course the question is how many spades and how many diamonds? that again is a question of agreement, perhaps you reply 1♠ always with weak hands and 4-6 in the pointeds, in which case the misbid was 2♦; perhaps you bid up the line in which case responder is only showing 5-4, then probably opener should pull to 2♠. but maybe it should show 5-5 - fishing for a 4-4 here is wishful

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

For us 2D would be 3rd suit / NMF, so it would be forcing.

Playing natural methods - 2-4 fit sounds, as if the 2D bidder had only 2 diamonds,
2D is certainly nonforcing, but should show inv. values, and 5 spades.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[whereagles]

both misbid because they didn't know the system

[Fluffy]

1 more, I had to day

pass-1♥
1♠-2♣
2♦

what's this?

[gwnn]

I think it's invitational-only fourth suit forcing. Never agreed how forcing it is but I suppose it could make sense to have everything by opener to be nonforcing.

[gnasher]

I think all these bids show the same hand-type as by a non-passed hand playing natural methods, with the range adjusted. That is:

- If you bid spades and then bid diamonds, you're showing 5+ spades, 4+ diamonds, and invitational values.

- If you bid fourth-suit, it shows invitational values, no known 8-card fit, and no stop in the unbid suit. Logically, opener's continuations are non-forcing, because both players are limited, responder's hand is quite well defined, and we might be too high already.